Tuesday, March 13, 2012

(1) Make a donation at Remember Building 7 - they'll run ads on TV with
the money
(2) Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth’s 10th Anniversary Campaign
(3) Activistpost.com: 9/11: A Time For Truth
(4) London Conference on 9/11 - Saturday October 15
(5) Dick Cheney had control of NORAD for the 3 months before and after 9/11
(6) Paul Craig Roberts: 9/11 After A Decade: Have We Learned Anything?
(7) General Assembly vote on Palestine: 1967 border is the point of
reference

(1) Make a donation at Remember Building 7 - they'll run ads on TV with
the money

Ethan Jacobs, J.D.
Activist Post
{visit the webpage to see the embedded links}

Now is the time to support the Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth’s
10th Anniversary Campaign by making a donation at Remember Building 7.
Remember Building 7 will use the donations for a historic nationwide ad
campaign in the month of October showing the American people the
unmistakable footage of Building 7's demolition and forcing the
mainstream media to finally discuss the issue. The campaign will be a
three-pronged blitz of TV, print, and out-of-home advertising. New York
City subways will be flooded with poster ads, while TV ads saturate
every major cable channel. Print ads will appear in several national
publications and in local newspapers in Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles,
San Francisco and Dallas.

1,548 Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth recently released a
must-see, 15-minute documentary entitled Solving the Mystery of World
Trade Center 7. Why did they focus on the destruction of 47-story modern
steel skyscraper WTC Building 7, which imploded despite the fact that it
was not hit by a plane? Because it proves beyond any reasonable doubt
that the World Trade Center buildings were destroyed by controlled
demolition.

Solving the Mystery of World Trade Center 7 begins with one of Europe’s
top demolition experts saying this regarding WTC 7: “This is controlled
demolition. Absolutely. It’s been imploded. It’s a hired job done by a
team of experts.” Next WTC 7 is shown collapsing next to other buildings
that are known to be controlled demolitions. As you will see, WTC 7
falls in the exact same manner. Narrator Ed Asner notes that it takes
months to prepare a 47-story building like WTC 7 for controlled demolition.

Then there is footage from 9/11 where firefighters say, “The building is
about to blow up. Move it back.” A medical student and other witnesses
heard explosions and described a shock-wave ripping through Building 7
immediately before it imploded. An air force medic describes a 3-2-1
countdown to the implosion. Several reporters, including Dan Rather,
immediately recognized that WTC 7 was a “planned implosion.”

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST/government)
claims that WTC 7 collapsed due to office fires. However, Richard Gage,
architect and founder of AE 911 Truth, points out that no steel
skyscraper in history has ever collapsed due to such fires. Gage and
structural engineers then prove that WTC 7 collapsed into its own foot
print symmetrically at free-fall speed, which even NIST admits. For such
a collapse to occur, every steel column would need to be cut at the
exact same time. “The symmetry [of the collapse] is the smoking gun,”
says another engineer.

Despite the fact that office fires cannot melt steel, there was plenty
of molten steel at WTC 7. How did the steel melt? Numerous professors
including Steven Jones and Niels Harrit found evidence of active
thermetic material (nano-thermite) in the dust of WTC 7, that is
high-tech explosives used to destroy steel structures. Nano-thermite
would explain why 9/11 firefighters gave interviews stating that they
saw molten metal “like lava, like being in a foundry.” NIST admits that
despite nearly 3,000 people being killed in the 9/11 attacks and
explosions (squibs) being clearly visible, they “did not test for the
presence of explosive residue.” Most of the 9/11 debris was quickly
destroyed by the government before proper testing could be done.

Larry Silverstein, the leaseholder of the World Trade Center on 9/11,
admitted on television that Building 7 was “pulled,” a term associated
with controlled demolition. Silverstein obtained insurance policies in
July 2001 for his World Trade Center buildings with a face amount of
$3.55 billion (less than two months before 9/11). After 9/11,
Silverstein sued the insurance companies arguing that two planes were
two separate attacks. He eventually won and was awarded up to $4.57
billion, depending on an appraisal that followed.

Additionally, the BBC and other news outlets reported 23 minutes before
that Building 7 had collapsed. This indicates that the news script had
been written with foreknowledge of the demolition.

Why else should you support the Remember Building 7 10th Anniversary
Campaign?

Top US government insider Dr. Steve R. Pieczenik said that Osama Bin
Laden died in 2001 of Marfan syndrome and that he was prepared to
testify in front of a grand jury that a top general told him directly
that 9/11 was a false flag inside job. Pieczenik cannot be dismissed as
a “conspiracy theorist”. He served as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of
State under three different administrations, Nixon, Ford and Carter,
while also working under Reagan and Bush senior, and still works as a
consultant for the Department of Defense. A former US Navy Captain,
Pieczenik achieved two prestigious Harry C. Solomon Awards at the
Harvard Medical School as he simultaneously completed a PhD at MIT.

'They ran the attacks,' said Pieczenik, specifically naming members of
the Bush administration …'I taught stand down and false flag operations
at the national war college, I’ve taught it with all my operatives so I
knew exactly what was done to the American public,' he added.

Pieczenik is not alone as hundreds of senior government officials
challenge the official 9/11 story.

The authors of the Project for the New American Century’s (PNAC) report
entitle Rebuilding America’s Defenses remain unaccountable. In the
Report, written one year before 9/11, they state that Americans will not
support the military conquest of the Middle East “absent some
catastrophic and catalyzing event––like a new Pearl Harbor.” That Pearl
Harbor was 9/11, which served as the pretext for the invasions of
Afghanistan, Iraq, and predator drone bombings in Pakistan. PNAC members
and/or report signatories include Dick Cheney (Council on Foreign
Relations), Elliott Abrams (CFR), Richard Armitage (CFR), Donald
Rumsfeld (CFR), Paul Wolfowitz (CFR), Robert Zoellick (CFR), Lewis
(Scooter) Libby, William Kristol (CFR), Steve Forbes , John Bolton
(CFR), Richard Perle (Bilderberg), and many more.

Three months before 9/11, Vice President Dick Cheney usurped control of
NORAD, and therefore he alone had the power to call for military
aircraft on the hijacked airliners on 9/11. He did not exercise that
power. On the contrary, the Secretary of Transportation on 9/11, Norman
Mineta, testified that Dick Cheney gave a stand-down order to U.S. air
defense on 9/11. Three months after 9/11, Cheney relinquished command of
NORAD and returned it to military operation. Dick Cheney was the CEO of
Halliburton before becoming vice president. Halliburton was awarded no
bid contracts to occupy Iraq.

Donald Rumsfeld announced that the Pentagon could not account for $2.3
trillion dollars on September 10, 2001. The next day, the story was
conveniently lost in the news of the 9/11 attacks. Rumsfeld also
admitted that Flight 93 was shot down, which was obvious given the fact
that parts of the plane were found scattered over 8 miles.

A number of top pentagon officials and San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown
were warned not to fly into New York on the morning of 9/11. Why didn't
the people on the targeted planes get the same warnings?

The FBI had foreknowledge of the 1993World Trade Center Bombing and
refused to stop it. Their informant wanted to replace the live bomb with
a fake, but the FBI then removed him from the case. The informant felt
he was being set-up and taped his conversations with the FBI. The
bombing killed six people and injured over 1,000.

Governments, including the U.S. government, admit they engage in false
flag terror like Operation Northwoods, and the more recent BATF
Operation Fast and Furious scandal.

Al Qaeda leader Anwar Al-Awlaki may be the first American on the CIA's
kill or capture list, but he was also a lunch guest of military brass at
the Pentagon within months after 9/11.

Many of the alleged 9/11 hijackers are “alive and well.” Additionally,
“The reason why 9/11 was not mentioned on Osama Bin Laden's most wanted
page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to
9/11," said Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI.

There is an abundance of evidence that the U.S. government had
foreknowledge of the attacks and insider stock trading on companies most
affected by 9/11 increased dramatically the prior week.

Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in
England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after
all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is
always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a
democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist
dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the
bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them
they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of
patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any
country

Al-Qaeda is nothing more than a database of mercenary fighters trained
and funded by the Pentagon and CIA. In 1979, al Qaeda, in the form of
the Mujahideen / Taliban, was America’s secret weapon in Operation
Cyclone. While rallying the public behind a war in Afghanistan and Iraq
after 9/11, the Bush Administration clandestinely let members of the bin
Laden family quietly fly out of the United States, even while all other
flights were grounded. It would be revealed in articles about the
“Airlift of Evil,” that U.S. forces also covertly exported Taliban
forces from Afghanistan to Pakistan to protect them from defeat after 9/11.

George W. Bush planned to stage a false flag attack after 9/11 to
justify the invasion of Iraq. “Mr. Bush told Mr. Blair that the US was
so worried about the failure to find hard evidence against Saddam that
it thought of "flying U2 reconnaissance aircraft planes with fighter
cover over Iraq, painted in UN colours". Mr. Bush added: "If Saddam
fired on them, he would be in breach [of UN resolutions]".

Zbigniew Brzezinski, Jimmy Carter’s National Security Advisor and
CFR/Trilateral Commission/Bilderberg member, suggested that the
government carryout false-flag operations on the United States to
justify war with Iran. In his 1997 Book, The Grand Chessboard: American
Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives, Brzezinski wrote of the
necessity for the U.S. to seize control the Eurasian Balkans, “...the
Eurasian Balkans are infinitely more important as a potential economic
prize: an enormous concentration of natural gas and oil reserves is
located in the region, in addition to important minerals, including gold.”

Like Brzezinski, CFR member Gary Hart wrote a letter suggesting that the
U.S. would engage in false flag operations to justify military actions
against Iran. In fact, he references several past admittedly staged
events such as the sinking of the Maine and Gulf of Tonkin incident.

FBI translator Sibel Edmonds, was dismissed and gagged by the DOJ after
she revealed that the government had foreknowledge of plans to attack
American cities using planes as bombs as early as April 2001. In July of
’09, Edmonds broke the Federal gag order and went public to reveal that
Osama Bin Laden, Al Qaeda and the Taliban were all working for and with
the C.I.A. up until the day of 9/11.

Al Qaeda is still funded and supported by the U.S. and NATO for the
purpose of destabilizing Libya with help from British SAS troopers.

Former CIA officials admitted to faking a Bin Laden video.

9/11 served as the justification for the Constitution-shredding Patriot
Act, warrantless-wiretaps of U.S. citizens, indefinite detention and
other devastating attacks on unalienable rights. It was also used to
justify torture of those that allegedly fought against U.S. invasions of
their countries and possibly even their children.

After 9/11, Homeland Security imposed unpopular TSA naked body scanners
and groping pat-downs on travelers and their children. In addition to
conditioning the public to accept warrantless searches at airports, the
DHS has rolled out checkpoints, mobile x-ray vans on public streets &
highways, on trains, buses and boats, as well as at sport stadiums,
hotels and shopping malls and beyond. Whistle blower Russell Tice
revealed that the NSA is spying on Americans without warrants and
building a database of everyone. Likewise, Mark Klein revealed that AT&T
is working with the government to monitor all Internet activity and emails.

Al Qaeda does not really exist as documented by the BBC.

9/11 served as the justification for the U.S. becoming a police state
through the destruction of posse comitatus. Now military police kidnap
people off the streets in broad daylight and stuff them into unmarked
cars. The TSA has invaded roads and highways with VIPR checkpoints in
violation of the 4th Amendment.

The 9/11 Commission Report is a 571-Page Lie that omits WTC Building 7.
Documents reveal that the government warned the 9/11 Commission against
getting to the bottom of the September 11 terror attacks in a letter
signed by Attorney General John Ashcroft, Defense Secretary Donald
Rumsfeld and CIA Director George J. Tenet. Additionally, Bush and Cheney
refused to appear before the Commission separately and both refused to
testify under oath, instead meeting with panel members informally and in
private, with no recordings of the meeting allowed.

The senior counsel to the 9/11 Commission, John Farmer, said that the
government agreed not to tell the truth about 9/11. Senator Max Cleland,
resigned from the 9/11 Commission after calling it a “national scandal.”
Cleland also said, “One of these days we will have to get the full story
because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House
wants to cover it up.”

9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerry said, “There are ample reasons to suspect
that there may be some alternative to what we outlined in our version,”
Kerry said. The commission had limited time and limited resources to
pursue its investigation, and its access to key documents and witnesses
was fettered by the administration.” 9/11 Commissioner Tim Roemer,
stated that Commission members were considering a criminal probe of
false statements. As quoted, “We were extremely frustrated with the
false statements we were getting.”

Drills such as “Vigilant Guardian” were being run during the 9/11
attacks which confused U.S. NORAD (air defense) personnel and pilots.
London underground bombing "exercises" also took place at the same time
of the 7/7 terror attacks. Police sources confirmed that hours before
Anders Behring Breivik launched his deadly attack at a political summer
camp on Utøya island on July 22, police had conducted a drill for a
“practically identical scenario.” The chance that drills would be going
at the same time and in the same locations as the actual attacks is
statistically impossible for one event, let alone all three of them.

Several informed people predicted 9/11 based on the corporate media’s
predictive programming in the months preceding the attacks.

9/11 served as the justification for the invasion of Afghanistan, where
U.S. troops guard and support the opium trade. As of 2010, estimates
state that 19,629 Afghans were killed and 48,644 injured due to the
invasion. Ninety-two percent of Afghans have never even heard of 9/11.

9/11 served as the justification for the invasion of Iraq, where British
Petroleum and Halliburton increased their profits. Despite having no
connection to 9/11, as of 2010, estimates state that 900,338 Iraqis have
been killed, 1,690,903 injured and millions displaced.

Many people were deceived into joining the military to avenge 9/11 by
invading Afghanistan and Iraq. As of August 20, 2011, there have been
2,689 coalition troop deaths in Afghanistan and 4,792 in Iraq. It is
estimated that over 100,000 coalition troops have been wounded, with
many losing limbs.

A Boeing 757 has a wingspan of 125 feet yet the pre-collapse hole in the
Pentagon was approximately 16 feet wide. Not one photo of a plane
hitting the Pentagon, one of most secure and video monitored buildings
in the world, has been released. Army Specialist, April Gallop, who was
injured by the Pentagon explosion and saw the hole that it caused, saw
no evidence that a plane hit the building. Preliminary CNN reports found
no evidence that a plane hit the Pentagon.

Pat Tillman had something to tell you before he was murdered.

Dozens of documentaries have obliterated the official 9/11 story.

On the morning of 9/11, George H.W. Bush, (Sr.) attended a Carlyle Group
meeting that Bin Laden’s Brother, Shafig bin Laden, also attended. The
Bush and Bin Laden families both invested in the Carlyle Group, which is
one of the world’s largest defense contractors and profited greatly from
9/11 and the War on Terror. In October 1997 Carlyle acquired United
Defense Industries.

Solicitor General Ted Olson’s claim that his wife Barbara Olsen called
him twice from Flight 77, describing hijackers with box cutters, was a
central plank of the official 9/11 story. However, the technology to
enable cell phone calls from high-altitude airline flights was not
created until 2004. American Airlines confirmed that Flight 77 was a
Boeing 757 and that this plane did not have airplane phones on board.
According to the FBI, Barbara Olsen attempted to call her husband only
once and the call failed to connect.

On October 22, 2008, Yukihisa Fujita, Congressman for the Democratic
Party of Japan made a 20-minute speech on the floor of the Japanese Diet
or House of Representatives. For the third time that year he directly
questioned the official version of 9/11.

Former Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge wrote in his book that he
was pressured by other members of President George W. Bush's Cabinet to
raise the nation's terror alert just before the 2004 presidential
election. Ridge did not believe there was a legitimate need to raise the
alert.

Five days after the 9/11 attack, Christie Todd Whitman, then head of the
Environmental Protection Agency, stated that the ground zero air was
safe to breathe. However, the EPA’s own Office of the Inspector General
later revealed that this was an outright lie as Asbestos levels were
known to be three times higher than national standards. “Whitman’s
deliberate and misleading statements to the press, where she reassured
the public that the air was safe to breathe around lower Manhattan and
Brooklyn, and that there would be no health risk presented to those
returning to those areas, shocks the conscience,” Manhattan Federal
Judge Deborah Batts wrote in February 2006. Now that it is public
knowledge and proven that the government conspired to lie about the
toxic dust, putting thousands of people’s lives at risk, and leading to
the deaths of hundreds, why on earth should we so readily believe any
other aspect of what they told us in the days and weeks after the tragic
event?

The following individuals have written books and stand to profit from
their tales of 9/11: George W. Bush (CFR), Tony Blair (Bilderberg), Dick
Cheney (CFR), John Yoo (CFR), Donald Rumsfeld (CFR), John Ashcroft
(CFR), Tom Ridge (CFR), Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell (who provided the
United Nations with false information to justify the invasion of Iraq
after 9/11), and John Bolton (CFR - W. Bush’s Ambassador to the United
Nations), former U.S. Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff (CFR -
who invests in defense contractors and airport naked body scanner
manufacturer Rapiscan), and Mayor Rudolph Giuliani (CFR).

Cass Sunstein, the administrator of the White House Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, considers individuals who doubt
government propaganda national security threats. He has outlined plans
for the government to infiltrate “conspiracy groups”, including the 9/11
Truth Movement, in order to undermine them via postings on chat rooms
and social networks, as well as real meetings. On page 14 of Sunstein’s
January 2008 white paper entitled “Conspiracy Theories,” he proposed
that “under imaginable conditions” the government “might ban conspiracy
theorizing” and could “impose some kind of tax, financial or otherwise,
on those who disseminate such theories.” In effect, Obama’s information
czar wants to tax or ban outright, as in make illegal, opinions and
ideas that the government doesn’t approve of. COINTELPRO was used
against Martin Luther King Jr. and “almost all groups protesting the
Vietnam War.”

More Americans civilians die from intestinal illness than from
terrorism. Figures collected in a study clearly show that Americans are
just as likely or more likely to be killed by accident-causing deer or
severe allergic reactions to peanuts than they are in terrorist attacks.

'Number of American civilians who died worldwide in terrorist attacks
last year: 8 — Minimum number who died after being struck by lightning:
29.' That’s the threat in the name of which a vast domestic Security
State is constructed, wars and other attacks are and continue to be
launched, and trillions of dollars are transferred to the private
security and defense contracting industry at exactly the time that
Americans — even as they face massive wealth inequality — are told that
they must sacrifice basic economic security because of budgetary
constraints.

The homeland security apparatus that was created after 9/11 to allegedly
monitor foreign terrorists has now been turned inward, with Homeland
Security focused on “domestic terror threats.” Such threats include
returning U.S. war veterans, libertarians, opposition to the private
Federal Reserve banking cartel, and constitutionalists.

Despite the contents of this article, the mainstream corporate media
continues to state that there is “no evidence” casting doubt on the
government’s 9/11 story. Skewed or outright fake polls are often cited,
while polls showing that the majority doubts the official 9/11 story are
ignored. By refusing to report powerful evidence clearly demonstrating
that 9/11 was a false flag event using controlled demolition, it can be
argued that the corporate media is aiding and abetting terrorists,
thereby becoming accessories to 9/11 and the subsequent wars and deaths.

Finally, 9/11 First Responders – including police, fire fighters, EMTs
and others– have been barred from attending the ceremony commemorating
the 10th Anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. Instead, warmongering
politicians including Obama and George W. Bush will grandstand at Ground
Zero.

Please support the Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth’s 10th
Anniversary Campaign by making a donation at Remember Building 7.

If you are unable to donate, please email this article to your friends,
family and contacts. Tell them to do the research and think for
themselves. Who gained from the 9/11 attacks and ongoing War on Terror?
You can also print 50 or more copies of this article for your neighbors.
Delivering 100 printed articles to your neighbors’ front door takes less
than an hour.

Thank you in advance for supporting truth and working towards justice. A
special thank you to Richard Gage and Architects and Engineers for 911
Truth, Patriots Question 911, Firefighters for 911 Truth, Scientists for
911 Truth, Scholars for 911 Truth, Lawyers for 911 Truth, Military
Officers for 911 Truth, 911 Truth, Medical Professionals for 911 Truth,
911 Blogger, Alex Jones and the Infowars Team, David Ray Griffin,
Journal of 911 Studies, Justice for 911, New York City Coalition for
Accountability Now, Dylan Avery, Korey Rowe, and Jason Bermas, Webster
Griffin Tarpley, Activist Post, David Icke, The Intel Hub, We Are
Change, Jeff Rense, Jesse Ventura, Global Research, What Really
Happened, the alternative media, and everyone else who has contributed
to the 9/11 truth movement.

Ethan Jacobs holds a Juris Doctor and Bachelor of Arts degree in
Political Science. Ethan’s passion is researching and writing about
important issues to defeat every form of tyranny over the mind of man.

shows how the organisers of 911 on purpose involved many people so they
would help with the coverup.
Kind of like an initiation into a gang by involving future members in a
planned crime.
Specifically, the "Jewish" ring leaders aimed for Zionists and Israelis
in general to identify with the perpetrators, exploiting the feelings of
collective fear and guilt cultivated since millennia to use "Jews" in
conspiracies.

The thing about this video that makes it interesting to me is the
unusual and original line of reasoning which it follows in order to
propose the startling hypothesis that some of the "smoking guns" of 9/11
may have been deliberately placed, in order to both incriminate and
protect the guilty parties.

The above statement may sound like an oxymoron - watch the video to
understand how self incrimination may indeed be a form of cover for the
perpetrators.

I would like see more such original ideas and research. The insider
trading in particular is an area which is begging some thorough
investigative journalism. I can see a best seller on this subject alone.

This is not fringe conspiracy theory, yet no prominent journalist will
touch this subject. Even the "debunkers" such as James Meigs and George
Monbiot tip toe around this evidence of high level foreknowledge which
is surely as damning as the implosion of WTC 7.

The theory proposed in this video by Ann Arbor 9/11 Truth is like an
Agatha Christie story where the the victim was stabbed 27 times by 27
different murderers - each for their own motives and benefits.

Mutual self incrimination by the criminals ensures they will continue to
protect each other. Consider, for example:
Larry "Pull it" Silverstein
The "Project for a New Pearl Harbor"
George "My Pet Goat" Bush
Dick "Of course the orders still stand" Cheney
Christie "The air is safe to breathe" Whitman
Jane "Salomon Brothers Building Has Collapsed" Standley

Bizarre, seemingly deliberate, self incrimination.

(6) Paul Craig Roberts: 9/11 After A Decade: Have We Learned Anything?

In a few days it will be the tenth anniversary of September 11, 2001.
How well has the US government’s official account of the event held up
over the decade?

Not very well. The chairman, vice chairman, and senior legal counsel of
the 9/11 Commission wrote books partially disassociating themselves from
the commission’s report. They said that the Bush administration put
obstacles in their path, that information was withheld from them, that
President Bush agreed to testify only if he was chaperoned by Vice
President Cheney and neither were put under oath, that Pentagon and FAA
officials lied to the commission and that the commission considered
referring the false testimony for investigation for obstruction of justice.

In their book, the chairman and vice chairman, Thomas Kean and Lee
Hamilton, wrote that the 9/11 Commission was “set up to fail.” Senior
counsel John Farmer, Jr., wrote that the US government made “a decision
not to tell the truth about what happened,” and that the NORAD “tapes
told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the
public.” Kean said, “We to this day don’t know why NORAD told us what
they told us, it was just so far from the truth.”

Most of the questions from the 9/11 families were not answered.
Important witnesses were not called. The commission only heard from
those who supported the government’s account. The commission was a
controlled political operation, not an investigation of events and
evidence. Its membership consisted of former politicians. No
knowledgeable experts were appointed to the commission.

One member of the 9/11 Commission, former Senator Max Cleland, responded
to the constraints placed on the commission by the White House: “If this
decision stands, I, as a member of the commission, cannot look any
American in the eye, especially family members of victims, and say the
commission had full access. This investigation is now compromised.”
Cleland resigned rather than have his integrity compromised.

To be clear, neither Cleland nor members of the commission suggested
that 9/11 was an inside job to advance a war agenda. Nevertheless,
neither Congress nor the media wondered, at least not out loud, why
President Bush was unwilling to appear before the commission under oath
or without Cheney, why Pentagon and FAA officials lied to the commission
or, if the officials did not lie, why the commission believed they lied,
or why the White House resisted for so long any kind of commission being
formed, even one under its control.

One would think that if a handful of Arabs managed to outwit not merely
the CIA and FBI but all 16 US intelligence agencies, all intelligence
agencies of our allies including Mossad, the National Security Council,
the State Department, NORAD, airport security four times on one morning,
air traffic control, etc., the President, Congress, and the media would
be demanding to know how such an improbable event could occur. Instead,
the White House put up a wall of resistance to finding out, and Congress
and the media showed little interest.

During the decade that has passed, numerous 9/11 Truth organizations
have formed.

There are Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, Firefighters for 9/11
Truth, Pilots for 9/11 Truth, Scholars for 9/11 Truth, Remember Building
7.org, and a New York group which includes 9/11 families. These groups
call for a real investigation.

David Ray Griffen has written 10 carefully researched books documenting
problems in the government’s account. Scientists have pointed out that
the government has no explanation for the molten steel. NIST has been
forced to admit that WTC 7 was in free fall for part of its descent, and
a scientific team led by a professor of nano-chemistry at the University
of Copenhagen has reported finding nano-thermite in the dust from the
buildings.

Larry Silverstein, who had the lease on the World Trade Center
buildings, said in a PBS broadcast that the decision was made “to pull”
Building 7 late in the afternoon of 9/11. Chief fire marshals have said
that no forensic investigation was made of the buildings’ destruction
and that the absence of investigation was a violation of law.

Some efforts have been made to explain away some of the evidence that is
contrary to the official account, but most of the contrary evidence is
simply ignored. The fact remains that the skepticism of a large number
of knowledgeable experts has had no effect on the government’s position
other than a member of the Obama administration suggesting that the
government infiltrate the 9/11 truth organizations in order to discredit
them.

The practice has been to brand experts not convinced by the government’s
case “conspiracy theorists.” But of course the government’s own theory
is a conspiracy theory, an even less likely one once a person realizes
its full implication of intelligence and operational failures. The
implied failures are extraordinarily large; yet, no one was ever held
accountable.

Moreover, what do 1,500 architects and engineers have to gain from being
ridiculed as conspiracy theorists? They certainly will never receive
another government contract, and many surely lost business as a result
of their “anti-American” stance. Their competitors must have made hay
out of their “unpatriotic doubts.” Indeed, my reward for reporting on
how matters stand a decade after the event will be mail telling me that
as I hate America so much I should move to Cuba.

Scientists have even less incentive to express any doubts, which
probably explains why there are not 1,500 Physicists for 9/11 Truth. Few
physicists have careers independent of government grants or contracts.
It was a high school physics teacher who forced NIST to abandon its
account of Building 7’s demise. Physicist Stephen Jones, who first
reported finding evidence of explosives, had his tenure bought out by
BYU, which no doubt found itself under government pressure.

We can explain away contrary evidence as coincidences and mistakes and
conclude that only the government got it all correct, the same
government that got everything else wrong.

In fact, the government has not explained anything. The NIST report is
merely a simulation of what might have caused the towers to fail if
NIST’s assumptions programed into the computer model are correct. But
NIST supplies no evidence that its assumptions are correct.

Building 7 was not mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report, and many
Americans are still unaware that three buildings came down on 9/11.

Let me be clear about my point. I am not saying that some black op group
in the neoconservative Bush administration blew up the buildings in
order to advance the neoconservative agenda of war in the Middle East.
If there is evidence of a coverup, it could be the government covering
up its incompetence and not its complicity in the event. Even if there
were definite proof of government complicity, it is uncertain that
Americans could accept it. Architects, engineers, and scientists live in
a fact-based community, but for most people facts are no match for emotions.

My point is how uninquisitive the executive branch including the
security agencies, Congress, the media, and much of the population are
about the defining event of our time.

There is no doubt that 9/11 is the determinant event. It has led to a
decade of ever expanding wars, to the shredding of the Constitution, and
to a police state. On August 22 Justin Raimondo reported that he and his
website, Antiwar.com, are being monitored by the FBI’s Electronic
Communication Analysis Unit to determine if Antiwar.com is “a threat to
National Security” working “on behalf of a foreign power.”

Francis A. Boyle, an internationally known professor and attorney of
international law, has reported that when he refused a joint FBI-CIA
request to violate the attorney/client privilege and become an informant
on his Arab-American clients, he was placed on the US government’s
terrorist watch list.

Boyle has been critical of the US government’s approach to the Muslim
world, but Raimondo has never raised, nor permitted any contributor to
raise, any suspicion about US government complicity in 9/11. Raimondo
merely opposes war, and that is enough for the FBI to conclude that he
needs watching as a possible threat to national security.

The US government’s account of 9/11 is the foundation of the open-ended
wars that are exhausting America’s resources and destroying its
reputation, and it is the foundation of the domestic police state that
ultimately will shut down all opposition to the wars. Americans are
bound to the story of the 9/11 Muslim terrorist attack, because it is
what justifies the slaughter of civilian populations in several Muslim
countries, and it justifies a domestic police state as the only means of
securing safety from terrorists, who already have morphed into “domestic
extremists” such as environmentalists, animal rights groups, and antiwar
activists.

Today Americans are unsafe, not because of terrorists and domestic
extremists, but because they have lost their civil liberties and have no
protection from unaccountable government power. One would think that how
this came about would be worthy of public debate and congressional hearings.

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was appointed by President Reagan Assistant
Secretary of the U.S. Treasury and confirmed by the US Senate. He was
Associate Editor and columnist with the Wall Street Journal, and he
served on the personal staffs of Representative Jack Kemp and Senator
Orrin Hatch. He was staff associate of the House Defense Appropriations
Subcommittee, staff associate of the Joint Economic Committee of
Congress, and Chief Economist, Republican Staff, House Budget Committee.
He wrote the Kemp-Roth tax rate reduction bill, and was a leader in the
supply-side revolution. He was professor of economics in six
universities, and is the author of numerous books and scholarly
contributions. He has testified before committees of Congress on 30
occasions.

In their near-hysterical efforts to prevent Palestinians from asking
the United Nations to recognize the Palestinian right to
self-determination and statehood in the West Bank and Gaza, Israel and
the United States have put forward a number of insupportable arguments
that cannot be allowed to go unchallenged.

The claim that the UN is not the appropriate address for bringing about
Palestinian statehood that underlies the various legal, political and
prudential arguments mustered against the Palestinian initiative can
only be described as a lie. Not only was the UN set up to deal with
issues of war and peace, it set the indisputable legal point of
reference for all subsequent Israeli-Palestinian peace efforts—Security
Council resolutions 242 and 338.

Indeed, one of the main purposes of the UN was ending colonial
domination and promoting the self-determination of native populations in
former mandated territories. It is the UN’s action in its Partition
Resolution of 1947 that established the legitimacy of a Jewish State of
Israel in a part of Palestine, at the time a British mandate, a fact
celebrated in Israel’s Declaration of Independence. That same resolution
established the legitimacy of Palestinian patrimony in an Arab state
whose territory was twice as large as Palestinians claim for their state
today.

Even more wrongheaded than the notion of the inappropriateness of
bringing this issue to the UN is the alternative venue advocated by
President Obama—a return to the deadlocked bilateral “peace process.” So
far, this “peace process” has enabled the transfer of over half a
million Jews from Israel into Palestinian territory and East Jerusalem,
but not one square inch of Palestinian sovereignty.

There is an even more fundamental misrepresentation at play here:
Security Council Resolution 242 declares unequivocally the
impermissibility of acquiring territory as a result of war, no matter
who started the war. What this means is that it is the party whose
territory is under occupation whose consent to changes in the
pre-conflict border must be obtained, not the consent of the occupying
party. If the occupying power fails to obtain that consent, it must
either return to the Security Council to obtain its permission to retain
any part of that territory, or withdraw without any territorial changes.
The assumption that in the absence of an agreement, the occupying power
can retain its permanent hold on the occupied territories is absurd. But
that is the absurdity that has defined America’s peace efforts—as well
as the EU’s—to this day.

The alleged legal objection to the Palestinian initiative is that it
violates the terms of the Oslo accords, which preclude measures by
either party to resolve unilaterally any of the permanent status issues.
If it were true, as Israel’s government maintains, that an impermissible
unilateral measure frees the other party from the Oslo accords’
obligations, then Palestinians were freed of Oslo’s obligations long
ago, for both the UN and the International Court of Justice have
declared that Israel’s settlements in the West Bank are not only
impermissible unilateral acts but in clear violation of established
international law.

More fundamentally, however, it is simply not true that the proposed
Palestinian initiative violates the Oslo agreement. Palestinians do not
intend to ask the UN to address any of the permanent status issues they
are required to negotiate with Israel. If the UN were to declare that
Palestinians have achieved the requirements of statehood—as they have in
fact been found to have done by the IMF and the World Bank—and a
Palestinian state were accepted into full UN membership, Palestinians
would still have to reach agreement on each of the permanent status
issues with Israel.

The United States and Israel have warned Palestinians to abandon their
UN initiative on prudential grounds as well, for even if they were to
succeed in obtaining UN recognition of their right to statehood in the
Occupied Territories, nothing would change on the ground, for Israel’s
government would be as indifferent to such a UN declaration as it has
been to countless other UN directives. Indeed, Israel’s foreign
minister, Avigdor Lieberman, has threatened that in those circumstances
Israel would feel free to annex far more West Bank territory than it
already has.

But if were true that UN action would have no effect whatever in
advancing the Palestinian cause, except perhaps to spur an even greater
Israeli land grab, why is Israel engaged in such frantic efforts to
prevent a UN showdown? Indeed, why does it not welcome the Palestinian
initiative?

The answer is that what the Netanyahu/Lieberman government fears most is
an international confirmation that the 1967 border is the point of
reference for Israeli Palestinian territorial negotiations, for despite
Prime Minister Netanyahu’s alleged acceptance of a two-state solution,
he remains as committed to the retention of most if not all of the West
Bank as are most other members of his government, most of whom belong to
the “Whole Land of Israel Caucus” in Israel’s Knesset. (Imagine what
would have been the U.S. reaction to a Palestinian parliamentary caucus
for the retention of the “Whole Land of Palestine.”)

A formal UN designation of the 1967 border as the starting point of
negotiations, especially if it includes a provision for “equal land
swaps,” would likely spell the end of the Whole Land of Israel dream.
For if Israel had to yield as much Israeli territory as it seeks to
acquire from the Palestinians beyond the 1967 border, it would wind up
with no more of the Land of Israel than it already possesses. That, too,
is why Netanyahu behaved so outrageously in trying to get Obama to back
down from his May 19 statement that the 1967 line and land swaps are the
essential elements of a territorial agreement.

What is so shameful is that not only have we failed to support a
legitimate Palestinian demand but we threaten to punish them severely
for it by denying them further U.S. financial support. Have we ever
issued such threats to Israel, even when its governments engaged in
behavior considerably more reprehensible than turning to the UN?

We have put forward our democracy as a model for the rest of the world
to follow. But in seeking to bludgeon Mahmoud Abbas into foregoing the
United Nations and returning to predictably futile negotiations with
Benjamin Netanyahu, the United States is placing its diplomatic leverage
at the service of Israeli policies aimed at preventing Palestinian
democratic self-determination. That is how the world will see it, no
matter how this administration will try to rationalize its actions at
the UN in September.

Henry Siegman, President of the U.S./Middle East Project, is a
non-resident research professor at the Sir Joseph Hotung Middle East
Program, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London.

About Me

'Mission statement'.
I am convinced that jewish individuals and groups have an enormous influence on the world. The MSM are, for almost all people, the only source of information, and these are largely controlled by jewish people.
So there is a huge under-reporting on jewish influence in the world.
I see it as my mission to try to close this gap. To quote Henry Ford: "Corral the 50 wealthiest jews and there will be no wars." `(Thomas Friedman wrote the same in Haaretz, about the war against Iraq! See yellow marked area, blog 573)
If that is true, my mission must be very beneficial to humanity.